Processor vs Graphics? Created 12 years ago2012-09-06 18:44:42 UTC by Striker

I've come across a tough decision. I started researching the market of notebooks/laptops, because I need one until next month( I'm starting college).

My sum is around 850$(more or less). After an awful lot of search and comparison, and basically learning the performances of components, I narrowed my choices to 2 laptops(both 17 inch and 750Gb):

Asus K75VM-TY033D
*i7-3610QM@ 2.3ghz- max 3.3ghz(4 cores/ 8 threads)
*4 GB of RAM
*Nvidia GT630M 2GB
Price: ~900$

Acer V3-771G
*i5-3210M@ 2.5ghz- max 3.1ghz (2 cores/ 4 threads)
*6 GB of RAM
*Nvidia GT650M 2GB
Price: ~805$

Both have pros and cons, let me mention them:

Asus laptop
++Extremely good processor
+Good esthetics, build quality, no fingerprints and dust collection
+Well, it's Asus
-+ only 4GB of RAM (not a problem, can be upgraded later)
-+ more expensive, cancels possible SSD upgrade
-GT630M is almost half as powerful as GT650M

Acer laptop
++Very good graphics (GT650M)
+6gb of RAM
+less expensive, can afford an SSD upgrade
-+ doubtful build quality, glossy finish: magnet for scratches, dust and finger prints
-i5-3210M is almost half as powerful as i7-3610QM( fun fact: they both exceed my current desktop CPU in terms of performance)

There's actually a laptop that solves the problems of both of the above(i7, 3610QM@ 2.3GHz, 8GB, 1TB, GeForce GT 650M 2GB). It's an Acer that still has the glossy finish problem, that wouldn't matter at how powerful it is. But, it costs... 1030$. Of course, SSD upgrade is a dream.

So I want your help on this tough decision.

Should I:

a) sacrifice graphic performance but enjoy very powerful computing performance and good build quality, thus purchasing the ASUS?
b) sacrifice computing performance but enjoy decent graphic performance and the possibility of an SSD upgrade, thus purchasing the Acer?
c) sacrifice my budget, good understanding with family, being a total dick, not having anything to eat for half a month, be enslaved by thoughts of guilt, and enjoying both good computing performance and graphics, thus purchasing the HIGHLY OPTIONAL Acer one?

The new laptop will basically be a desktop replacement, and I'll have to stick by it at least 4 years(college). That means stuff like browsing, multimedia, gaming, mapping, compiling, editing programs.

CPU.

Asus all the way here. Had the same dilemma when i bought mine should i get better graphics or a better cpu or wait till ivy-bridge comes out.
You could get a cheaper one if you dont plan on only gaming, any of those can run BF3 no prob.
Dont be tempted by SSD upgrades or upgrades in general, 99% of the time this will never happen.
17" is a lot, think about that if you are going to carry it around a lot, i dont even consider 17" to be a laptop because its huge.

The mistake i made was that i dont really need a laptop now im broke.
And yes go for more CPU power.

It will only be around 3kg, I don't think that's a lot.

[EDIT] Are YOU SURE the less powerful GPU won't be a big problem? Because that's really all that stops me from buying the Asus one.

The weight is not a problem the dimensions of it might be a problem sometimes.
I have a gtx525m and im not complaining. Go for more CPU power, 2 cores suck (threads dont make a huge difference).

The thing is that I crave for the 650m, but also for the i7. Afaik, the 630m is just a rebranded Fermi while the 650M is the newer Kepler.
If only GPU's could be upgradeable in laptops too...

Wow you've been doing your homework.

I have no idea if they are or not, but I'm slightly inclined to believe they are in some cases.

Like rufee said, don't think about "future upgrades". They most likely won't happen. You will completely forget about them. And if they do happen, they'll be something you are not thinking about right now.

I also second what he said about the screen. It's a laptop, you will probably be lugging it around. The larger/heavier it is, the less you will want to.

Dont be tempted by SSD upgrades or upgrades in general, 99% of the time this will never happen.

Like rufee said, don't think about "future upgrades". They most likely won't happen. You will completely forget about them. And if they do happen, they'll be something you are not thinking about right now.

My current desktop computer, bought in 2007, is left with only them motherboard and case as the original components.
I really do consider buying MOAR RAM and an SSD.

The size matters as it will be a desktop replacement and I got used to a 23" monitor. Even before that I had a 19" monitor, so going down to 15" is a drastic move. I don't think 17" is so bulky as many describe.

Does someone from here actually have a 17" laptop?

You can still use the old desktop monitor.

If you go with the first one make sure you upgrade the RAM immediately. I would get the more expensive third option, personally.

Not at the college dorm.

Penguinbody, can you explain your opinion?

I would go with the more expensive option too.

In a few years I'm going to remember my computer and what I accomplished with it, and not what food I ate.

Also if you eat mostly terrible food but budget for a few decent meals a week, you tend to appreciate the good meals more.

I hardly eat any junk food... yet. I'll see how things develop at college.

Anyway, buying the more expensive laptop is quite a difficult decision, if not impossible. I'll have to discuss this with my parents.

Also, I read your post wrong, Penguinboy(sorry for writing your name incorrectly again...), I thought you said the 2nd option. Can the glossy finish be solved with an auto-adhesive foil?

If I had to choose from the other two I would go with the better GPU Acer.

Most things (especially non-games) don't take advantage of the multiple cores anyway, and a better GPU will serve games more than a CPU will. Also, more ram!

I hate that both of them are "100% better GPU or CPU" tradeoffs though. Can you find one that compromises a little?

Unfortunately no, and I've been looking on 3 major computer shops. I know that whenever it's the time to buy something that will have to last me long, it will always be difficult. When I bought the Nikon P100, I literally read reviews day after day for a month. It's an ordeal.
Even now I have a spreadsheet comparing these laptops :/.

The fact is that I could have compromised the 17" and go for a 15", but oddly enough, offers seem to be more profitable on the 17" ones!

It's also making me truly pissed off that I can't find at least one more laptop with the GT650M in the price range between the two Acers. It's either those 2 that I listed here, either one that exceeds 1100$.

You asked if anyone here had a 17" laptop and know one touched on that, I got one in 2007 and carried it on me for about 2 years. It's not too bulky at all. A nice laptop bag for a 17" is a really suitable size for wearing.

get the better gpu, the i5 is plenty powerful for any games these days. In fact, there are so few games that use multi threaded technology that you will never use the full power of the i7 anyways.

i7 is more of a future proof, or compile machine

I have the same opinion as Grim, more RAM and the better GPU is more important than a slightly faster CPU, I think.

PB, it's not only "slightly" faster, it's almost double. I'll take information from this notebook mobile processor comparison chart and post here:

i5-3210M
3DMark06 CPU score: 3487.2
wPrime 1024M: 582.1 sec

i7-3610QM
3DMark06 CPU score: 5932.8
wPrime 1024M: 289.7 sec

As you can see, the i7 is ridiculously faster. Oh btw, my desktop CPU, a Pentium Dual-Core E6500, scores 2351 at the 3Dmark06 CPU test.

Now I also find a comparison table for mobile GPUs here.

Nvidia 630M
3DMark 11 - Performance 1280x720 (avg score): 1047
The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (high) avg: 21 fps
Battlefield 3 (High) avg: 16 fps
Crysis 2(High) avg: 27 fps

Nvidia 650M
3DMark 11 - Performance 1280x720 (avg score): 2300
The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (high) avg: 43 fps
Battlefield 3 (High) avg: 32 fps
Crysis 2(High) avg: 60 fps

Again, you can see there's a clearly visible performance difference. Now there is e GPU that fills the gap: the Nvidia GT640M, it scores similar performances as 650M. The problem is, I can't find any laptop in this price range featuring 640M! Argh!

[EDIT] But I also have to consider laptop reliability, and from that study Asus seems to be the best manufacturer on the market.

If you want an undying laptop - > lenovo
I would be cautious about getting an Acer, some say they break fast.

Lenovo has higher reliability than Acer, but... Asus seems to take the lead at this moment.

Wow never though that HP sucked so much

They dont, they just sell 5x the amount of laptops

The study has been made on a fix amount of laptops Don Punch, not on statistics.

HP do suck. I stay away from anything HP due to bad experiences with their products.

My laptop is HP and I haven't had any problems with it

1/3 of those are from drops and spills, so having a higher percentage of the market does make sense.

You don't understand statistics.

These are percentages, they are independent of the number of units out there.

I have a hard time believing there's that much difference in quality when these things are being pumped out of the same Chinese factories with different labels on them in many instances.

I chose c) in the end.

Penguinbody

I would be cautious about getting an Acer, some say they break fast.

Acer, Dell and Gateway are worthless shit. Stay away from all of them.

see
pee
yoo

Welcome back CrolloElliot!
I've got the Acer and it's really not bad. It stays relatively cool as well.

I've had an Acer Laptop for three years in December and have not once had to get any repairs done.